Breaking the chains, winning the games, and saving Western Civilization.

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Alpha Mail: In defense of Team Woman

You might not think that women would attempt to defend the execution of a former love rival by the wife's husband, but that's only because you fail to understand that her perspective completely depends upon which role the defending woman sees herself:

Heard this little rationalization by the person I give a ride to work. This morning, only 30 minutes ago.

She
stated that the woman executed for pornography in North Korea who was a
rival of Kim's wife, well, it couldn't have really been orchestrated by
Kim's wife.

1) She doesn't hold any actual power.

2) She may have some power but it is really her husband.

3) It is unlikely that she has any influence over her husband.

4)
Okay, maybe she does have some influence, but she has to do what she
must to consolidate her power because she could die at any moment if her
husband wanted to get rid of her.

5) She probably really didn't do it, because the video wasn't really porn.

6)
there is no way the N Koreans would actually let a woman have any
power, so it must have been because Kim was tired of the other woman.

7) women are frightened and must do what they can to stay safe.

Her
defense of this woman was all over the map as I was amused making the
rationalization hamster dance in defense of Team Woman. Never thought
I'd get such obvious defense of someone like Kim's wife, but there you
go: Team Woman was attacked and must be defended.

Point seven is the trump card. "Women are frightened and must do what they can to stay safe." This can be used to justify anything, from the Holocaust to pink shoes on NFL players. Keep it in mind if you're ever attempting to talk a woman into something. All that is required is to convince her is to scare her sufficiently, then offer her the solution that will save her from the scary.

15 comments:

Keep it in mind if you're ever attempting to talk a woman into something. All that is required is to convince her is to scare her sufficiently, then offer her the solution that will save her from the scary.

@: All that is required is to convince her is to scare her sufficiently, then offer her the solution that will save her from the scary.________

My wife used to be very stingy with money. However, after two fights with cancer and the birth of our twins, it is very easy for someone to talk her into expensive purchase by citing cancer risks. She even joined an "organics are the real bargain" group where she can get organic milk for $6/gal instead of $7.

Also, remember, the more women are afraid, the more they vote socialists into power.

Gun control. Social security.Medicare.Rent control.Speed limits.Unions. (just throwing that in for fun).Marriage law.Human Resources and the background checks.TSA and the useless pat downs at airports.

All brought to you by Team Woman and the Quest for Security and Safety.

Also, you should here the logical disconnect on the topic of women who work with death row inmates and become obsessed with them.

Her brother is an attorney (she is one too) who is in charge of providing legal guidance for death row inmates. He tells her (who then tells me) how every.single.woman.attorney. in his office has developed feelings for at least one death row inmate.

As a good Bay Area liberal, she still can't make the connection, the attraction of the bad boy alpha male.

Reminds me of the Kwisatch Haderach. How the women Reverend Mothers could not look into the void, only the 2 males (Paul and Leto Atriedes) were able to look inside.

Humans are sheep, or bison. When something scary comes around they arrange the lambs in the center, surrounded by the ewes with the males toward the outside. Hierarchical. Though I wonder if the ram-bow gammas are inside.

I wonder if a criminal threatened a bomb and told everyone to get to the center, if they would not act precisely as a herd of sheep. Note how sheep-dogs can manage a herd of sheep.

But this is where Women (and Men) are called in Christ - to go past the fall and sin nature and rationalizations and live lives of truth. Yet he is the good shepherd - probably because too many will be sheeple. Yet we are supposed to flock to him.

I've read an interesting account of a white woman captured by Indians in Montana. She was cooperative and submissive, but the Squaws were rebellious (I wonder if the term squawk derives). I'll transcribe the paragraphs when I have an opportunity. Game is ancient, of course.

Bringing Game into it just because there are women involved? Well and because it works, if we shouldn't discuss that because speaking it will make it twu(er)? Bastage! I nearly wet my pants I was so scared for her. /playing bunny

I love coming here and laughing. You just make it so easy. One part of that last is true. I did nearly wet my pants, thinking back on how well that Game cue works, and laughing about it. You just have to get them over themselves and then their fear and then... It's up to you.

Heck, one Roman emperor even claimed his infant son ruled the empire...

It's like these women have never read Lewis' work on Inner Circles. Do they realize that there is nominal and actual power? And that nominal and actual power often differ? And that in historically patrilineal societies men by role and law hold all nominal power (or most; Queens, ladies of note and woman merchant/businesswomen don't seem too rare) but that doesn't tell us who holds *actual* power.

Given male behavior vis a vis women, assuming that there have always been delta and gamma types, there must have been a fair number of guys who let their wives or mistresses push them around, even to the extent that it was well known that the man was a figurehead.

In fact, in a time of near universal marriage, the probability of such arrangements coinciding with real power is 100 frickin' percent.

Differing 'actual' and 'nominal' power structures is usually bad, but in times when the nominal leaders are actually incompetent idiots, it may be good that someone who has some idea of what they are doing is pulling the strings.

The point here, which I see every day that we happen to carpool together is this:Many of the points contradict each other, few of them hold up before the merciless light of logic, but ALL are trotted forth in defense of Team Woman.

There are times I can see out of the corner of my eye that she is looking at me to see my reaction, as sometimes I struggle to contain my mirth.

She realizes this woman is evil, her actions are evil, but if it is seen as even a peripheral attack on Team Woman, then the defenses kick in. For my own lulz, a few days later I'll bring up the same exact subject, but script it differently so that the Team Woman defense isn't triggered, and the results are amusingly different.

The interesting thing about this argument is that its biggest flaw is not inaccuracy (women often have very good reason to be frightened) nor foolishness (trying to stay safe as best you can is generally only common sense) but its implicit moral justification of its absolute ruthlessness. "Women... must do what they can to stay safe" -- even if that amounts to orchestrating the execution of a rival via manipulation and self-degradation. Sufficient fear and danger, for a woman, excuses anything and everything done to avoid that danger.

The irony is that the defenders of this stance have inherited the worst of both worlds; they continue to denigrate cowardice in men while refusing to demand courage of women.